During cross-examination in the $1 million defamation suit brought by former Duavata News Editor Arnold Chanel against Elaine Chandra, Chanel agreed with defence lawyer Mohammed Saneem that two key posts published on 20th and 25th April do not directly refer to him.
Saneem put it to Chanel that each post would form a separate basis for a defamation claim.
Saneem then asked Chanel whether he was specifically mentioned in the posts, or whether Duavata News or the hashtags used could identify him individually, to which Chanel agreed they could not.
When asked what linked him to the posts, Chanel said he was the only person in Fiji selling dogs for $15,000 each.
Saneem responded that he was not aware of this and said sales records could be provided as evidence.
Chanel maintained that this was how they knew Chandra was referring to him, adding that they were alerted after the videos were posted.
Saneem then put it to Chanel that Cane Corso Fiji also lists dogs for $15,000 each, arguing that a reasonable breeder would not necessarily associate the posts with Chanel.
High Court Judge, Justice Savenaca Banuve said he had seen the posts about the dogs but had not linked them to Chanel, adding that the Cane Corso is an unusual breed in Fiji.
When asked about Cane Corso Fiji, Chanel said it was a brand.
Saneem then put it to him that it was not registered as a company under the Companies Act.
Saneem also questioned Chanel about Duavata News publishing a one-and-a-half-page article after Chandra's husband, Sumit commented on a politician's social media page.
He asked whether the article was intended to intimidate the couple, to which Chanel replied, "Not necessarily."
Justice Banuve then questioned why Sumit's comments were considered newsworthy.
Chanel said the article was published after Riddhi Damodar contacted Duavata News.
Saneem further questioned why the article included Chandra's husband's occupation and workplace, asking what made him newsworthy.
When asked why he should be considered separate from Duavata News, Chanel said it was a separate entity and that he was no longer its editor.
Saneem then suggested that Duavata News formed opinions in its reporting, questioning why Elaine Chandra was mentioned in the article when the comments were made by her husband, Sumit, and did not refer to her.
Meanwhile, during his examination-in-chief, Chanel said he felt embarrassed and worried after Chandra allegedly claimed that the Police Criminal Investigations Department had a case against him.
He maintained that he had never been questioned or charged by the CID.
Chanel also told the court that he was significantly affected by the posts, claiming he received death threats and that his family feared for his safety.
The hearing continues tomorrow.
